Proposed Amendments on Current Indian Governance Systems

SOME PROPOSED AMENDMENTs/ ACTs towards Social Democracy in Indian
Constitution
1. Any government employee, from chief secretary to village watchman, (direct or indirect), who gets any salary or facility (direct or indirect) from government or social structures; should be directly called as SERVANT (SEWAK) in place of Secretary or Officer. It should be compulsory in all name plates, all documents and in all types of
conversations.
2. Indian Administration Services should be called as Indian-Public-Facilitation -Services.
3. Some organizations are demanding for Right to Recall for public electoral representatives in Parliament, Assemblies, Pachayats etc. If society should have Right to Recall for Public Representatives, then, why it should not have Rights for Direct or Indirect government employees. Local Social Governance System should have direct and open rights as final authority to social audit of any direct or indirect government employee or department or structure. Local Social Governance System should have direct and open rights as final authority to dismiss or suspend or punish or remark in character-service book to any direct or indirect government employee or department or structure.
4. All National/ Regional/ Local policies should be verified by Local Social Governance System as final and last authority. (If centre has no capacity to get verification then it has no right to form, implement any policy). All social
welfare policies (including- judiciary, education, health, development, commerce and finance etc fields) should be strictly verified by Local Social Governance System as final authority.
If Local Social Governance System gets that government structures i.e. Parliament, Assemblies, government departments or public servants are not farsighted or have no understanding of local problems for solution, then, Local Social Governance System should be final authority to form policy for itself and government machinery will execute.
5. National Budgets are being finalized by closed-centralized powers without any verification from Local Societies by big financial groups, high level secretaries and centralized political powers (who have no understanding and also are not accountable to Local Society or Communities). How a very small group can decide for millions of times bigger group These non-social, non-accountable and inhuman processes must be stopped and should be changed towards accountable systems. Budget should be finalized from Local Social Governance System and government machineries should execute the decisions of Local Social Governance System.
All direct/indirect government structures [i.e.- Parliament, Assemblies, panchayats, execution
systems, judiciary systems etc are included] should be converted into
direct-open-public-facility-management systems from centralized-closed controlled-administrative
ruling systems. And all types direct or indirect government structures should become direct
accountable to local society and last-man.
Author---
Er. Vivek Umrao
Coordinator- Local Governance & Decentralized Economy Social Group

Sponsor

Links

Social Governance with Social Accountability means common people, common society and social groups working together to achieve social goals and visions for local
social welfares/ social developments. All types of power should be exercised as close as possible to the last individual and local society; because most useful learning takes place at the grass-roots level. Diversities in circumstances vary from place to place, therefore it is
essential that solutions should be adaptable and flexible with local circumstances. Thus, social solution system must be as close to the last
individual, local communities and common society.
May be, some initiatives will fail in their aims, but the process will give some valuable learning. These un-successes, in fact, will give valuable learning, surprising opportunities and unexpected positive outcomes. Thus any initiative will not be a total failure.
There may be difference of views among human beings but no conflict of interests. It is not possible for a human being to have a complete idea. Some part of it would dawn on one, some on another and some on a third one, and they would all go to constitute the whole. Hence differences in views are necessary. It is a gain and no disadvantage.
www.localgovernance.org/amendments.html
Please Visit Article on Social Ownership and Social Economy at---
www.localgovernance.org/socialownershipintro.html